2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumYou could say that Reid just didn't have the votes to pass the talking filibuster---
but that would be bullshit. Harry made it clear he didn't WANT the talking filibuster and that insured that he didn't have the votes.
You could say that the Republicans surely won't risk being seen as obstructionists during the President's second term---but that would be bullshit. They don't CARE how they are perceived; they don't have to worry about winning elections as long as they are allowed to buy and steal them.
You could say that we may be in the minority in the future and we might want to use the GOP's tactics against them---but that woud be bullshit. The Democrats are just too damn "nice" to play smash-mouth politics.
Harry Reid should step down as leader for the good of the Democratic Party and the nation. THAT'S not bullshit.
patrice
(47,992 posts)bvar22
(39,909 posts)....and maintains the illusion of a controversy.
The theater might even result in more votes and donations if it appears that The People almost won something.
Imagine how droll Washington would be if all the Done Deals were simply announced as Done Deals at the beginning of every session.
What would FOX and MSNBC have to talk about 24/7 ?
Remember how exciting and dramatic the year long Public Option Kabuki was?
Now THAT was some great scripting!
For a while there, I actually believed we had a chance.
You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their rhetoric, promises, or excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]
patrice
(47,992 posts)bvar22
(39,909 posts)To test my "theory",
we would have to have solid evidence of something like the Party leadership agreeing to ditch the Public Option in a private agreement with the Republican Leadership,
while insisting In Public that they were still fighting for it.
Now, if we had evidence something like THAT,
then the above speculation moves beyond mere theory.
The Wielding Truth
(11,415 posts)Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)The deal Harry Reid got is actually a good one
===
-snip-
Under the agreement, the minority party will be able to offer two amendments on each bill, a major concession to Republicans. This change is made only as a standing order, not a rules change, and expires at the end of the term.
The new rules will also make it easier for the majority to appoint conferees once a bill has passed, but leaves in place the minority's ability to filibuster that motion once -- meaning that even after the Senate and House have passed a bill, the minority can still mount a filibuster one more time.
Reid won concessions on district court nominations as well. Under the old rules, after a filibuster had been beaten, 30 more hours were required to pass before a nominee could finally be confirmed. That delay threatened to tie the chamber in knots. The new rules will only allow two hours to pass after cloture is invoked before a nominee is confirmed.
The two leaders agreed that they will make some changes in how the Senate carries out filibusters under the existing rules, reminiscent of the handshake agreement last term, which quickly fell apart. First, senators who wish to object or threaten a filibuster must actually come to the floor to do so. And second, the two leaders will make sure that debate time post-cloture is actually used in debate. If senators seeking to slow down business simply put in quorum calls to delay action, the Senate will go live, force votes to produce a quorum, and otherwise work to make sure senators actually show up and debate.
The arrangement between Reid and McConnell means that the majority leader will not resort to his controversial threat, known as the "nuclear option," to change the rules via 51 votes on the first day of the congressional session. Reid may have been able to achieve greater reforms that way, but several members of his own party were uncomfortable with the precedent it would have set. And Reid himself, an institutionalist, wanted a bipartisan deal for the long-term health of the institution. Reid presented McConnell with two offers -- one bipartisan accord consisting of weaker reforms, and a stronger package Reid was willing to ram through on a partisan vote. McConnell chose the bipartisan route.
-snip-
Full article here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/24/harry-reid-mitch-mcconnell-filibuster_n_2541356.html
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)If you fool Harry once shame on you, if you fool......... ah shit, McDipShit should be able to fool anyone.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)will be officially changed.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Atticus
(15,124 posts)I agree that is makes some slight improvements, but it is far less than what he was in a position to deliver IF he wanted to.
He didn't want to.
And, it is that weak sister attitude that makes him unfit to continue in the leadership position.
He rewarded the obstructionists and that is difficult to overlook or forgive.
politicaljunkie41910
(3,335 posts)old like Strom Thurman while doing nothing to advance his party's causes.
LiberalFighter
(50,950 posts)He needed at least 50 Democrats and there were too many that were either not supporting it or on the fence. The Democrats had 53 of their own and 2 Independents in their caucus.
Someone else on a different site suggested that there should had been a vote on the Udall/Merkley/Harkin resolution first. If that vote had failed then Reid's rule change would had gone poof because he wouldn't had had the bargaining chip. The Republicans were in a position of either agreeing to Reid's rule or take the chance that the U/M/H resolution would had passed.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)That had their asses on the barbwire fence.
onenote
(42,714 posts)that would have gotten there had the broader deal on filibuster reform been approved. And that is an undeniable fact.
The House, not the Senate, is what blocks the President's agenda.
Atticus
(15,124 posts)onenote
(42,714 posts)What's probably unrealistically optimistic given gerrymandering is to imagine that the Democrats will control the House after 2014. We can hope, but the odds are against it.
Atticus
(15,124 posts)Hopefully, you're better than this post would indicate.
Hippo_Tron
(25,453 posts)The Republican minority believes that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ought not to exist, therefore they filibustered any person appointed to that position so that it's legally unable to function.
The Republican minority believes that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms ought not to exist, therefore they filibuster any person appointed to be the director of that agency and its been run by an acting director for years.
The Republican minority believes that the National Labor Relations Board ought not to exist, therefore they filibuster the President's appointees to the board. The President made recess appointments that were today invalidated by a court.
The Republican minority has not only the power to block legislation, they also have the power to stop the executive branch from functioning by abusing the power of the filibuster to keep the President from appointing people to key positions.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)wants him to.
By the way, was this "agreement" included in the Senate rules or just a handshake deal with McDipShit?
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)... will be officially changed.
They've been debating it on the Senate floor - the vote will be probably be tonight.
http://www.c-span.org/Live-Video/C-SPAN2/
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)budkin
(6,703 posts)GOP can still block any bill it wishes.
doccraig67
(86 posts)So basically now they will be able to easier get judges and appointments through. If they find themselves in the minority next election, well?
budkin
(6,703 posts)Gerrymandering fucked us.
trueblue2007
(17,228 posts)ancianita
(36,092 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)ancianita
(36,092 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)performance.